Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Badaboom

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by BadaboomIn terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses.

Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list. Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned.

More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug: It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to. The reactionary element doesn't help either. "Open world 1999 RAWR!"

Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices. Is that surprising? If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard. (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it. The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Badaboom

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by BadaboomIn terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses.

Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list. Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned.

More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug: It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to. The reactionary element doesn't help either. "Open world 1999 RAWR!"

Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices. Is that surprising? If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard. (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it. The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

Why do you assume that the people don't know why they don't like instancing? Obviously both have pros and cons. I also don't feel hatred for one design over another. I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Badaboom

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by BadaboomIn terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses.

Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list. Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned.

More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug: It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to. The reactionary element doesn't help either. "Open world 1999 RAWR!"

Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices. Is that surprising? If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard. (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it. The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

Why people dislike instancing has been listed many times in this very thread. But thank you for the snarky ad hominem attack, instead of saying anything of substance.

And it's been pretty firmly established that the pros far outway the cons in MMO design. (In small scale COOP online RPGs like Diablo, that's different, but when making actual MMOs, instances are the antithesis of the genre)

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by SouldrainerSo basically, only the group who gets there first can ever run a dungeon. What?

Not all dungeons are designed like WoW's linear hallways. You're trying to deconstruct the idea of public dungeons, but its very clear you've never been in one. Hell, I'm not even sure how familiar you are with MMOs if you're saying Darkfall is "Everquest style". Whereas most of the people debating the other way have done both public and instanced dungeons.

Pretty much the only thing detractors have used were examples from EverQuest, which I agree, had issues without instancing. But those problems were fixed by subsequent MMOs as early as 1999.

Roaming the threads from early 2009 reminds me a lot about Launch and the issues we had buying the client and the queues when entering the game :P

Well, all this information is months after the EU launch, also that does not imply they had the idea for 2 separate servers from the start.

As far I can remember, Aventurine philosophy was only a single server ever and opening NA server was just because of latency issues.

No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by samvenice

Originally posted by DavisFlight

However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

I did wait in line for a mob spawn. A lot. Both rare spawns and also xp groups in "special spot" where you had to get on a "list"

Helped only by the fact that playing on US server, I had the EU timezone to my advantage.

Examples: Cloudsong, Shades of Mist, GoV, Battler etc (and in some cases, not even drop guaranteed! so had to camp and get kill stolen some more!). (or dragon epic not being up - lol)the truth.

That was during the Trials of Atlantis expansion, which is univerally regarded as the expansion that broke DAoC. I should have stated "Pre ToA DAoC never needed instancing" but that's annoying to type and just confuses most people.

Report this post

I think Guild Wars 2 does it the way I would say perfectly fits the nature of instances. If you want story elements in your mmo add them.

What he's talking about is player interaction. Guild Wars 2 is possibly the best example of how not to do it. I played that game for two months and there was absolutely no reason to group besides instances. The fact that they throw you into a group, killed the need for anyone to actually interact. And they didn't. All an instance does.. is remove you from the game world. How does that help? For example; Vanguard had dungeons.. but they were not instanced. When you went into one, you had to watch for other groups that were in the dungeon who may possible want to punch you in the face.. cause THEY want the goodies. That is good stuff and player interaction. Having a piece of the world just for your group removes you from other player interaction.

I agree with Adventurine's point of view here. Of course my first MMO was Shadowbane. There were no instances and it was a completely player driven world. I had better times in that game then any game since.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Badaboom

Why do you assume that the people don't know why they don't like instancing? Obviously both have pros and cons. I also don't feel hatred for one design over another. I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

Because I've been reading this ...stuff... for quite some time now. It clearly much more firmly based on emotional attachments to specific games (or specific frequently hero-worshipped classic developers) than it is to detached logic.

I get it. It's just the way gamers are; we form our judgements of what makes "good" games from our earliest attachments...but they almost never change thereafter.

Fortunately, my attachment was formed to a game that significantly predates MMOs...and several times more 'sandboxy' than the best 'sandbox' renditions ever seen in MMOspace. I see the party platform for what it is--usually unnecessarily devisive and far too binary.

Huh...just like every other topic on a message board, come to think of it.

I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

No worries. 'Sandbox' seems to be the marketing bullet point du jour, starting just very recently (EQNext announcement? That's the point I first noticed the marketing team's newest scrambles, anyway). We'll get at least a solid half-dozen to evaluate, over the next year plus.

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by DavisFlightNo, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Gdemami

Originally posted by DavisFlight

No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

Athens, Greece – December 5th, 2008 - Audio Visual Enterprises SA and Aventurine SA in a joint statement today announced that their highly anticipated MMORPG title Darkfall Online will launch across Europe on January 22nd, 2009. North American players are also welcome to participate in the European launch of Darkfall which will precede a North American launch.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Gdemami

Originally posted by DavisFlight

No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

So the only thing that this read has shown is that most people who played DF agree, instancing shouldn't be in DF, and as such applaud AV for not putting instancing in it. I also applaud AV for not instancing DF , considering it would go against their core concept I'm not sure if it was even a consideration or they deserve praise for it though.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Redemp So the only thing that this read has shown is that most people who played DF agree, instancing shouldn't be in DF, and as such applaud AV for not putting instancing in it. I also applaud AV for not instancing DF , considering it would go against their core concept I'm not sure if it was even a consideration or they deserve praise for it though.

Report this post

All this talk-y-talk is fine and all......I mean, a guy has a dream and people respond.

But with that said, I'd care more for things like.....oh I don't know....cheaters and exploiters? Those 2 will hurt this game a lot more than any instancing ever could.

Sheesh, it's almost as if people have forgotten what Darkfall was like, heh.

All games have exploits, and Darkfall had less hackers than most MMOs. There was about 3 weeks where there were a ton of rampant hackers, but they all got banned in a mass wave when security was upgraded. I remember someone posted a link to the hacker forum, the tears were delicious.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Badaboom

Why do you assume that the people don't know why they don't like instancing? Obviously both have pros and cons. I also don't feel hatred for one design over another. I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

Because I've been reading this ...stuff... for quite some time now. It clearly much more firmly based on emotional attachments to specific games (or specific frequently hero-worshipped classic developers) than it is to detached logic.

I get it. It's just the way gamers are; we form our judgements of what makes "good" games from our earliest attachments...but they almost never change thereafter.

Fortunately, my attachment was formed to a game that significantly predates MMOs...and several times more 'sandboxy' than the best 'sandbox' renditions ever seen in MMOspace. I see the party platform for what it is--usually unnecessarily devisive and far too binary.

Huh...just like every other topic on a message board, come to think of it.

I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

No worries. 'Sandbox' seems to be the marketing bullet point du jour, starting just very recently (EQNext announcement? That's the point I first noticed the marketing team's newest scrambles, anyway). We'll get at least a solid half-dozen to evaluate, over the next year plus.

You compare people liking non instanced games to political parties, when you are the ONLY person in this entire thread who has brought up sandbox vs themepark, and have lumped everyone who dislikes instances into the sandbox category, which is just wrong.